Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35834595›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Exploring the pre-instruction gender gap in physics.

Eric Burkholder, Shima Salehi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Eric BurkholderDepartment of Physics, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7420-4290
Shima SalehiGraduate School of Education, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a substantial body of work in physics education looking at gender disparities in physics. Recent work has linked gender disparities in college physics course performance to disparities in high school physics preparation, but to our knowledge, the origin of the disparity in high school physics preparation is still underexplored. In a select sample, we found that women on average had lower force and motion conceptual evaluation (FMCE) pre-scores (the FMCE is a short conceptual assessment of Newton's laws), and FMCE pre-score entirely mediated the effects of high school preparation and social-psychological factors on exam performance. The gender gap in FMCE pre-scores could not be explained by differences in the number of physics courses taken in high school. Instead, we find that the gender gap in the FMCE is partially explained by female students' higher levels of general test anxiety. We hypothesize that the format of the FMCE, a timed assessment, triggers stereotype threat in female students despite being a low-stakes assessment. Therefore, instructors and researchers should take care in interpreting the results of such concept inventory scores and should re-think the way they assess understanding of physics concepts. Results of this work aligned with previous findings on gender disparity in timed exams call upon investigating gender equitable assessment formats for evaluating physics knowledge to replace timed assessments, either high or low stakes.

Indexed as

PhysicsStudentsFemaleHumansMaleSchoolsSex FactorsUniversities

Identifiers

PMID35834595
PMCPMC9282597

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.